Treat others with basic decency. No personal attacks, shill accusations, hate-speech, flaming, baiting, trolling, witch-hunting, or unsubstantiated accusations. Threats of violence will result in a ban. More Info.

Do not post users' personal information.

Users who violate this rule will be banned on sight. Witch-hunting and giving out private personal details of other people can result in unexpected and potentially serious consequences for the individual targeted. More Info.

Vote based on quality, not opinion.

Political discussion requires varied opinions. Well written and interesting content can be worthwhile, even if you disagree with it. Downvote only if you think a comment/post does not contribute to the thread it is posted in or if it is off-topic in /r/politics. More Info.

Do not manipulate comments and posts via group voting.

Manipulating comments and posts via group voting is against reddit TOS. More Info.

Your headline must be comprised only of the exact copied and pasted headline of the article. More Info.

Submissions must be an original source.

An article must contain significant analysis and original content--not just a few links of text among chunks of copy and pasted material. Content is considered rehosted when a publication takes the majority of their content from another website and reposts it in order to get the traffic and collect ad revenue. More Info.

Articles must be written in English

An article must be primarily written in English for us to be able to moderate it and enforce our rules in a fair and unbiased manner. More Info.

Spam is bad!

If 33% or more of your submissions are from a single website, you will be banned as a spammer. More Info.

The ALL CAPS and 'Breaking' rule is applied even when the actual title of the article is in all caps or contains the word 'Breaking'. This rule may be applied to other single word declarative and/or sensational expressions, such as 'EXCLUSIVE:' or 'HOT:'. More Info.

Abe Lincoln once said "The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly"
If drug prohibition were strictly enforced, 85% of the US population over the age of 47, including 3 presidents would do prison time, NOT jail time, PRISON time. What they do instead is target the poor and voiceless.

In addition, laws are not strictly enforced so that they can be used as technicalities. With a wealth of laws on the books that are selectively enforced, they can pick and choose who they want to put in jail.

"If drug prohibition were strictly enforced, 85% of the US population over the age of 47, including 3 presidents would do prison time, NOT jail time, PRISON time. What they do instead is target the poor and voiceless."

Actually the real stat is that of Americans who make it to at least 12th grade, 89% admit to having used illegal drugs by age 50. If you want to extrapolate to all Americans, at least 91-92% of Americans should be in prison. And since this (mostly) isn't counting the people who have used drugs but lied about it, the real figure would actually probably be closed to 93-94%.

Correct, it is a justice system of the elite, by the politicians, for the corporates.

The politicians and corporations of the USA have never been interested in freedom, justice or democracy. They are solely interested in their corporate profits and personal power, controlling the population by fear and lies, and keeping people as stupid and misdirected as possible.

Obama's administration chose not to prosecute anybody involved in the financial meltdown or creating two unfounded wars. Renewed the patriot act. Kept Gitmo opened. Dumped a bunch of money to banks who didn't use it to help the working people.

After the shithole that was the Bush Administration, Obama had it pretty easy. He could have been Abraham Lincoln to James Buchanon. How in the fuck could he have fucked that up? Obama will be considered a largely weak and ineffective president.

Ya, it wasn't a "fuck up". I've noticed a lot of people really don't want to admit to themselves that obama is fucking them over. Everyone really really wants to like obama. It's time to be honest to yourself. He was never on your side.

It's not so much that he's fucking people over--he's a huge improvement by any metric. It's just that, as contrarian said, he didn't really have to do much of anything and he would have been heralded as the savior of freaking humanity... but... he kind of hasn't. He's an establishment/conservative person when what is needed is anything but...

Some of us were realistic in 2008 and continue to be realistic today. Obama is not and was never going to be a savior. And even with those moderate expectations, he's disappointed in some important areas (I really thought he'd be better on civil liberties than he turned out to be). But that same reality based view means acknowledging that he's done some good things as well - he's improved some things and at least moved the ball forward on others. And we can acknowledge there are at least a few cases where he did genuinely try to do the right thing and Congress cockblocked him.

Point is, he's better than the last guy (by a lot). The goal for next time is to get someone better than Obama, who'll take the ball forward even more. And then after that, get someone even better. Problems that were decades in the making aren't going to be undone in two years, particularly when one of those problems is a political system that just doesn't allow for anything other than incremental changes.

Reddit really pisses me off with this now, now, NOW mentality. The reason conservatives won is because they were willing to play the long game, they spent decades setting up the infrastructure and political environment where their ideas would dominate regardless of who's in power. No single politician is going to undo that, certainly not in one term. If we want things fixed we have to start thinking on the scale of decades, not election days.

I suspect it's more the system in place Washington. True believers on both ends of the spectrum, like Kucinich and Paul, are marginalized. Presidents seem to have all their advisors chosen for them, as demonstrated with Obama's choice of financial advisors and the marginalization of Volker.

You can't hope to win a national election without tens or hundreds of millions in campaign funding. Even Obama's unprecedented small-donor-oriented campaign raised roughly half its funds from corporations, wealthy individuals, and PACs. The entire system is completely captured.

Things like this upset me because I feel the majority has forgotten obama's 2nd speech to the people. His face was SULLEN. After he won the election he was debriefed & became aware of the magnitude of the obstacles America had before it.

Some like to say Obama had a shit sandwich.

Others like to say he's a dreamer & hasn't done anything for the people.

I'd say not a single person running for office had a freaking clue what to do next.

PLEASE! Everybody needs to wake the fuck up. Not a single president since Kennedy (probably much earlier) was autonomous. I know that you'd like to believe that democracy and freedom rules in America, and a movement or ideology for the people can triumph. That's still the case, but the room to maneuver is getting smaller and smaller. Who's moving the puppet wires? Powerful economic interests and corporations that you'd never guess existed or had a say. Obama's administration is miniscule compared to that. You think you know until you know.

All Obama had to do was reverse some of the worst policies that Bush put in place during his tenure as President and we would have happy. Obama had a democratic majority in both houses when he arrived in office. But we just expected too much, right? Clearly, only republicans have the balls to get their agenda passed and progressive should just sit back and make up excuses when their their leaders do nothing.

"After the shithole that was the Bush Administration, Obama had it pretty easy."

Pretty easy? BUSH had it easy, all he had to do was make stupid choices and left the consequences to the next guy to take his seat. Policy changes and new laws/legislation often don't 'kick in' for several years. Obama has had the biggest clusterfuck to deal with since the Depression. Except this time there's no world war to prop up the economy. I certainly don't hold up Obama as perfect, he's made many choices I don't agree with. However, he has already accomplished more progressive reforms and positive change than any leader we've had in a long time. Obama is only one man, and there's a lot of other politicians and businessmen who need to be held accountable for the injustices the OP cites.

This. Obama could be cynically lying to us all, but I find it more likely that because of the way the entire government works, the coroporations with special interests in the Senate and Congress were able to effectively shut down anything he could do.

I'm to the point where I couldn't agree with you more, Terrorific. The more I read, the more it incites absolute blood-rage or utter and incurable depression. I keep hearing, "We need to fix the system and take it back for the working class!" but that's what I hear, not what I see. What I see is a complacent and obedient America where people would rather keep the heads down and do their job than get involved, which under almost any other circumstance is not such a bad thing.

Is there a way to fix or at the very least curb this sort of mentality?

The Internet. It is a fascinating double-edged sword. On the one hand, it is fantastic for organizing and informing people on a massive scale. On the other hand, it makes it far too easy to "inform" rather than act. There are a ton of movements based around awareness, rather than action. Make people "aware" of things, and I suppose the idea is that eventually the right person will become aware and take care of the problem.

It is easy for me to sit here and type out this paragraph, and inform a large group of people of my views. Some may repost, share, retweet, etc. But for all of that sharing and awareness, not a goddamn thing actually got done.

This post is a perfect example of the problem. The entire power structure of america is fucking over the citizenry, and yet people are still quibbling about left-vs-right politics. the current situation is not the fault of any one administration, or any one party. it is brought on by the ineffectiveness of the entire american political system. the corporations and the corporate media control the left and the right, the democrats and the republicans, obama and bush. and yet instead of seeing the problem, people insist on blaming whichever politician they don't like.

the democrats blame the republicans, and the republicans blame the democrats, and all the while the CEOs are laughing their asses off because they can get away with whatever they want. it doesn't matter who gets elected, the same people are still running the country.

Make contact with the initial founders of the Tea Party before it was taken over by the Koch Bros. Many of their initial platforms were anti-govt but also anti-corporate, find the areas of common ground with them, and work together from both sides of the political arena, liberal and conservative, to identify political candidates who stand for democracy and freedom, rather than for corporate control.

Work with local political parties which support anti-corporate candidates. This means voters are going to need to accept that a candidate is unlikely to be a perfect fit on all their issues, but the most important issue to eliminating corporate control on politics, law, etc. Any moderate (semi-centrist) candidate who stands for the people rather than the corporates should be an acceptable compromise.

Judge candidates based on their past record, voting, actions, business etc and not on their words.

As always, if you aren't actively involved in working for acceptable candidates, then you are letting the corporations choose for you (again).

The alternatives are to do nothing or some sort of armed uprising, which is not a good alternative, as these very seldom have a good outcome.

Those aren't the only choices. There are plenty of effective ways to make change and in a lot of cases electoral politics isn't the most effective. There's direct action (eg, I helped occupy a Bank of America branch with US Uncut ( http://usuncut.org ) on Saturday), there's protest, there's creating and supporting alternatives to capitalism (eg, community gardens for food, credit unions for money, co-ops for tons of stuff), there's lobbying (eg, calling or visiting) government officials, and a lot more.

Also, one point - the political views you're talking about is populism. Left/right is really irrelevant, but look up the Populist Party. They were one of the most successful third parties in US history and partially because of them we have things like the 8 hour work day and direct election of senators. They were an alliance of farmers (back when farmers were a significant portion of the population) and labor. They elected a bunch of local officials, governors, senators, congressmen, and got a decent amount of presidential electoral votes, too.

It's been happening at a lot of branches across the country and they're calling it a "bail-in," which is basically just a punny way of saying "teach-in."

There were probably 20 protesters there and about 8 of us went into the bank. We sat down in the lobby, in their big comfy chairs, and the two organizers talked to us about how Bank of America didn't just pay $0 in taxes last year, but actually received $1.9 billion in tax credits. They talked a lot about other economic injustices and it was more like a conversation than a class, actually.

The others who came stood outside with signs and handed out fliers, and once the cops kicked us out, we joined them, too. The cops actually told us that they agree with us, but they're just doing they're job - and there's no reason they shouldn't agree with us. The basic message of US Uncut is that even if we just closed existing tax loopholes and enforce the law (instead, most companies in Pennsylvania, for instance, pay a corporate tax rate of less than 3% even while on paper it should be close to 10%), there wouldn't be nearly as much of a budget crisis.

And these tactics can and should be applied to countless issues, not just corporate tax dodging.

Honestly, I think that a physical uprising is about the only real way to get anything done at this point. Trying to go through official political channels is pointless - THEY control the game and THEY can simply choose to bury anyone whose views go against their agenda in red tape, misdirection and so forth.

But a few million people storming Washington D.C. like the people in Libya and Egypt are doing and like the oppressed all throughout history have done, charging the elite and beating some ass, well...that tends to get things done. I'm not saying to kill or gruesomely torture anyone, but sometimes, human beings that have grown so full of themselves and risen to the top of society by exploiting the rules that we all basically agree upon to keep from having to go back to living in trees & by exploiting the people who economically serve them, these people need to be reminded that while they may be powerful within the framework of society, politics & economics, they are ultimately few and, thus, powerless when it comes to the laws of the jungle (i.e. a few hundred thousand angry fists).

As Kevin Spacey said in "Se7en": "Wanting people to listen...you can't just tap them on the shoulder anymore. You have to hit them with a sledgehammer. And then you'll notice you've got their strict attention."

Except that a physical uprising needs a common, and clearly identifiable, target, otherwise it is fragmented. At the moment, there are liberals howling about insane right-wingers, you have conservatives screaming about evil socialists, and you have a minority yelling about corporations. Plus a range of others screaming about their own private hobby horses.

Unless you can get all of those screaming the same thing, you don't get a popular uprising, you get a civil war where the corporations sell guns to every side around and still make a profit.

Easy - the targets wouldn't be Democrats or Republicans, socialists or conservatives, but corrupt politicians and corporate heads as a whole, period. The few that are honest & wish to do some good (e.g. Ron Paul, Bill Gates) are easily identified, but damn near everyone from the top down in government and business seems to follow the same pattern: spout pretty words to get to where you want to be, then follow through on almost none of it while you focus on your own wealth & agenda.

You can argue about different people having different definitions of right & wrong, but deep down, everyone knows when someone's being a greedy asshole. It's universal, be it a President covering up murders, a CEO taking taxpayer money to keep his cronies rich or even just a Little League coach taking $50 here and there to tweak his starting line-up and fix games. Assholes are assholes and that's what the target should be. "Politics" is basically synonymous with ass-kissing, back-stabbing and self-interest - none of which belong in government.

Its not easy if you can't convince people that those are a common target.

Media continues to push the right vs left divide, thereby ensuring there is little common ground and no agreement on a common target. If you can't get that message out, and convince people of its validity, then you won't break them oput of the right vs left split.

Statistically, no, not all of them would. I believe that a lot, if not a majority, would stand with the people, though. Not just because of sympathy with the revolution's beliefs & goals, but also because of war weariness related to the Middle East and because it's a lot harder to quell a mob with deadly force when you realize that your parents, siblings, children and/or friends could catch one of your bullets.

The military is surprisingly a lot more left than in the past. I know that every person I work with with the Air Force would never shoot an American even if it meant going to jail for insubordination. It is just a job and a way to get money for college for the most of us.

I have wondered this, being a marine I can see us beating the shit out of people but not unloading rounds into crowds. I think it would be pretty evenly separated and peer pressure would be a huge influence

I think boycotting is a possible solution. Create the goods we need without them, or at least involving them as little as possible. Buying local, pretty much. The corporations buy the politicians to set the rules. It's not that the politicians are crooked to begin with, it's just that they're dependent on the money to get elected/reelected. Obey them or you're (politician) out of a job. If you can minimize the influence a corporation has in an area (town, city), unions and such, like-minded groups of people, will become the more important sponsors of a politician. Sure, the financial contributions are smaller, but these groups can be made up of a fairly large number of people, resulting in votes. Communication and such throughout.

America needs to get mad, like, Peter Finch in Network kind of mad. MAD AS HELL and not going to take it anymore. But as long as they've got NASCAR, Wrestling, Reality TV, Spectator Sports and Church to keep enough peoples minds soft and docile, then it won't happen.

I've wondered about that. It's a real mishmash. Reddit is whatever you want it to be; a place for social-political discourse or a place to upload pictures of your cat sleeping and everything in between. Reddit engages me, that's why I'm here. I can have conversations about things here that are unwelcome or taboo in the real world.

A quote that I have been seeing quite a bit lately is Jefferson's "the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants", and I personally consider it to be correct in a literal sense.

Violence, but no one ever will. These people literally stole houses, life savings etc. and not one drop was shed because we are too busy watching March Madness, American Idol et. al brought to us by the same bank that stole billions from the peasants. As long as the illusion of democracy is still intact and we can munch on the dollar menu while playing Words with Friends on our cell phones, it will never change.

every person who sees this and agrees, needs to say something. I don't care if it won't change anything, we are not going to sit and let this happen. Not on my watch not in my time.

Posters, incognito graffiti, corporate sabotage, Tactical Espionage Activism, boycotting, writing, singing, nude protests, hell ANYTHING that will bring attention to this SIMPLE realization. We have the majority of will, something that a false god like Money CANNOT and WILL NOT control. There is no police force higher than us, no law above nature. Our founding fathers knew this, that our natural state is democracy.

Truth. It's really horrible how things are. I can only hope there is a change, but the man promising hope and change has brought neither. Next time it is going to come from the people, hopefully, but they are still sedated.

I do not believe that anyone who can make it to become president will ever change what needs to change, and for me, at the inauguration Obama obliterated all hope of change by stating: "...it's the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours..."

IMO, he clearly stated there that the profits stay with the corporations, and the losses with the people.

Ever since, I've not seen him do anything that changed my mind about him; only the opposite. Don't get me started on his silence during the Gaza slaughter of 09. Never forget.

Obama has brought change, but not a lot, certainly not enough, and there is certainly no sign that he has any interest in breaking the current corporate hold on the American political, legal, economic and social world.

The challenge is that even if change does come from the people, most are still so brainwashed by corporate propaganda, that the change will turn into a left-vs-right civil war, and not a people vs corporate uprising.

I don't think he can change much with the opposition being as big and powerful as it is. It seems a little like he is effectively handicapped in a lot of ways. I also don't think one term is long enough given the government situation he inherited from Bush.

By virtue of his elected position, he has the ability and opportunity to use his visibility to lead the country. He certainly wouldn't get his own way (I hope) but he could publicaly and visibily champion those causes he believed in, and try to sell those to the people, and encourage community buy-in. The fact that he has chosen not to do so says a lot about his asperations. So he is interested in things like health care, just not very much, and certaniyl not enough to try and fight for it. He is much more interested in corporate support and funding.

He is not interested in picking a fight over something he sincerely believes in, he always chooses the conciliation road, even though it has been proven every time that road always loses. So Yes, you can blame a lot of things on Bush, and on the Republicans. But you can blame a lot more on the Leadership he has (not) shown.

This is exactly my opinion of him as well. I don't buy the argument that he had too powerful opposition to get anything done. He really didn't put much effort at all into trying to make things happen. If he had put as much energy into governing as he did in campaigning, he could have done great things. Instead he continued and in some cases expanded the horrible policies enacted in the Bush era, thereby making them bipartisan. The lost opportunities for leadership we've seen since 2001 are truly tragic.

It's partially the other excuse (the majority doesn't want it; kinda hard to argue since no one can speak for everyone, despite that being the basis of our political system) but moreso, it's an issue of priorities; namely, his fucking job.

I believe he did put as much energy into governing as he did campaigning, he just did it in the context of not offending anyone enough to eliminate his chance for re-election. To put a pretty frame on it, he wanted to have 8 years to advance his policy goals instead of 4. If he was a passionate advocate of these issues, he never would have been able to gain political office, and if he became one after gaining the office of the president, he would have been painted as being elected on false premise (lol, republicans can get away with saying stupid shit, and the corporate media doesn't help) and as a result, lose all chance of re-election.

Your problem is you think your opinion on things is shared by the majority. It is not. Most people want to be comfortable, not be bothered, and don't want to think about politics. They are deeply conservative in the traditional sense and corporations provide the doodads that make them happy. ( I have seen this with anarchists and Apple, so it is not a limited issue). Your problem is not that we don't have a representative democracy, but rather that we do and you don't like what the majority wants. Obama is the best President we could hope for in this real world. Who was better?

Obama was elected (elected by a majority) based on promises that he didn't even try to deliver. Polling showed that many of the progressive policies were implementable, if he had only really put the effort into it. Instead his starting point for negotiation was complete capitulation.

At a minimum he could at least enforce the law, and not continue and extend policies that go against the core principles that that the US was built upon. If a person can't make a compelling case against preventative detention (let alone advocating it) he has no business leading this country.

You know there's one really one only good reason for you all to have guns down there, and you haven't realized it. Give the people who have been butt fucking you all into the ground a good fuck you in the form of a bullet to the groin!

My wife and her friends think I'm a conspiracy nut whenever I try to explain to them that CCD cameras are all about giving governments and corporations power to monitor and control 'the masses' and are in fact regularly used by people in authority to break the law. Preventing crime is just a cover story. Potential political rivals, peaceful - legal activists are spied upon for any and every opportunity to harass. At the same time footage of police violations are suppressed or 'lost'.

But yes, the surveillence society certainly plays into the hands of anyone willing to abuse those systems, and while I don't believe that most of these system are actively involved in supressing freedoms, there are many people willing and able to use them to do so when an opportunity presents itself. Unfortunately, all too many of such people are in the intelligence, political and law enforcement areas, where abuse can become just part of the job.

it's remarkable how many elements of Wikipedia's definition of Fascism are reflected in US policies today:

Fascists believe that a nation requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong. Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition to the state.

Again, this isn't because the CEO's of companies wake up and say "I want to destroy America today." It's because they're just trying to maximize profit for their company; that's how America is built.

If we want to change, we don't need to go after the corporations for trying to maximize their profit, but we need to go after the system itself. Which, unfortunately, won't change because of how far into our current system we are.

I just have to chime in here and say that from what I can gather from news ( and their bullshit reporting ), anonymous' actions, and what I read on the internet. The government is trying to please companies to keep them and their money in the country. that means giving them breaks and bail outs etc, etc. what ever they want, including power and lots of it. So you basically have a system trapped by itself that can not make change. You can not have a man promise to make change and then come through if companies give him the same bullshit they give every other politician, IE give us what we want or we take our business to china or some other developing country. If you want a strong country, we need to elect the people who are willing to tell the white haired guys with the money and three piece suits to kick rocks. We should buy products made in our country by our people. Stop buying made in China, and other countries that pay a man a dollar a day to make something priced at what it would cost if it were made here. Just a rant...correct me if I'm wrong and down vote away.

I am on board with boycotts. I am already actively trying to buy from companies who have not gone the way of "outsourcing" to "stay competitive in the market place". Example. american made boots over Dr. Martens who now make their boots in China and Thailand I believe. I was very disappointed. If you want quality products, do research. We have the internet these days you know.

What I don't understand is why nobody wants to meet up or have a national gathering to protest, think about, and change the situation. Even if such an event didn't cause immediate change at least like minded people could get together and realise that they are not alone. If anyone else agrees with me and wants to help me organise a gathering like this let me know.

That's because the damn thing was weaksauce and did the "both sides are just as bad" routine. Calling out the criminals who ruined this country is not on the same level as screaming TEH SCARY BLACK MAN IS GOING TO MAKE TEH GOVERNMENT TAKE MAH MEDICAREZ!!!

To be fair, I don't think anyone is in jail for filesharing, as it is a civil offense, not criminal. Though there are proposals right now to make it criminal, which is frightening. And people have gone to jail for torture.

And also it might be worth noting that someone rich and/or powerful who smokes pot won't go to jail so while the laws may be unfair, the application of laws is also unfair.

Private Investigator Anthony Pellicano was sentenced to 15 years in prison for illegal wiretapping.

The longest length of time anyone has been jailed in the US for copyright infringement is 3 years - although that was David Fish, who had set up a dedicated Warez server and shared around 13,000 items illegally, not just someone sharing a few songs.

Look buddy, I get your point. But at least get your facts straight before getting all riled up.

When US Presidents are sworn in they are taken into a private room and told who really runs America. They emerge visibly aged. I saw a video when Obama emerged and he looked this way. I wish I could remember the Coast to Coast AM interviewee who said this, because he was an insider.

totally agree. this is a little 'bleeding heart' for this string but its also a class/socioeconomic issue. case in point: crack (a poor persons drug) is considered a felony and is punishable by jail time (disgusting to put addicts in with actual criminals...but i digress) while coke (a rich persons drug) is only a misdemeanor and NOT punishable by jail time on the first offence. its not just about the corporations vs. the average person...its the haves vs. the have nots.

Actually it's a criminal injustice industrial complex. Way too jobs depend on a continuous stream of major and minor criminals. Lawyers, judges, prison guards, cops, legislators, schools of criminal justice and all of the support workers would be out of work. Now that we have a whole new TSA layer with that thousands of more people depending on this douchebag system for their continued eating at the trough.

Well, that may be, but not for the reasons you state. In this system it is the USA and the G7 who exploit the rest of the world. As for smoking pot, that is legal in California. As for sharing files, I think the RIAA is now broke, so we won't be hearing from them in a while, and I don't see how any creative work of the quality we've grown accustomed to could get done if file sharing were made completely legal.

We do have a system of exploitation, but the vast majority of the exploitation happens inside corporations, and it is a form where individuals agree to the exploitation and therefore take part in it. You can go into business for yourself, but that is terrifying and risky, although I believe it is also more satisfying due to the increased level of autonomy.

The main thing that bothers me about America is the politics and the society. I don't feel safe walking down the street, and I think our politicians think they are working for the CEOs of GM, Chevron, GE, and these other massive worldwide corporations.

Other than these corporations, I have no idea what the USA stands for. Freedom? That's ridiculous. Waging multiple wars has a corrosive effect on freedom. Real freedom means you can say what you want without fear of retribution, but I am a slave to my career interests. I can't say "the USA should disband the armed forces" since my peers would think I'm crazy. Democracy? This is more plausible. The USA would like to promote democracies because they are more stable and easier to work with. Also China scares me. Equality? That's preposterous. Pretty much any developed European country has a higher degree of equality than the USA.

I think waging war on behalf of those who want accountable governments in their own country is reasonable, but I'd rather live in a country that doesn't treat its own citizens like shit, and the USA treats its own citizens like shit.

So what about all the people who ordered it? The people who attempted to create a legal fucking justification? Abu Ghraib was fucked up, but it wasn't the same thing as the program that specifically and intentionally tortured for information.

People are incapable of justice. Our so-called justice system has always been misnamed.

We should have a system which seeks to protect society from those who prey upon others. Instead, we have a system which seeks to control personal behavior and does little or nothing to deter the truly dangerous.

I can't point to a single person who I can prove beyond a reasonable doubt is responsible for violating criminal statutes concerning "crashing the world economy, torture, or unconstitutional wiretaps," and there are complex due process issues concerning the prosecution of each. Crashing the world economy? Well, that's just vague. There is no criminal statute against "crashing the world economy." Unconstitutional wiretaps? Well, they're legal now, and if they are later deemed to be unconstitutional, it would be a very serious violation of due process to retroactively punish those who were following the previous law.

On the other hand, even if I disagree with it, the law and the evidence is rather clear concerning pot smokers. There are no real due process issues.

Honestly, submissions like these demonstrate a considerable lapse in critical thought. Give us a name and a statute, then present your evidence. Don't just say, "This undefined group of persons should be held criminally liable for these undefined acts under these undefined statutes." That's just plain nonsense.

I believe that Democrats should take a heavier stance with political advertisement just like the Republicans, essentially using their own strategy against them. Their smear campaigns and the like. Democrats are much too humble. We could use meme's as a weapon, making viral jokes and pictures that spread the word of their hate and slander.

Defining a justice system like this would mean that every justice system has been a tool for exploitation. Just because there are bad things in the world does not mean that this is some uniquely corrupt time. Always strive for justice but try not be so melodramatic, it is self serving.

I'm probably beating a dead horse here, but to me, everything in our modern US seems to be centralized around money and big corporations obtaining it.

I believe the laws on pot are so restrictive because if decriminalized or legalized, the huge alcohol and tobacco industries would have some competition going. Naturally, they're going to use all their power (money) to keep the war on drugs going. Another huge industry, which is entertainment media such as record labels and film producers, also have a good amount of power (money) and do their best to make sure that if somebody is getting a new album or seeing a movie, they profit.

Naturally, the ones who are fucking up our economy, torturing people, warmongers, and breaking the Constitution have a great deal of political power and, yes, money. So everything as I see it right now is based on money. You want to get elected as a person with high political power? Get a dickton of money. But from where? Large corporations that are going to influence how you make laws and bias your sense of justice. It's bullshit.
Well whatever I guess I'll end my 18-year-old rant here, take it for what it's worth.

The government is not by the people for the people, it's by the rich for the rich. So who's going to start the revolt? Who's going to pull the trigger? Eh? You? No? Then shut the fuck up!

Until we start offing these bastards, until we strike fear into their hearts and make them beg our forgiveness, there will not be change. They do not fear us, we fear them. Start the killing or shut up and bow down to your masters.

The United States is a police state. It has the largest incarcerated population per capita in the free world. That's a slap in the face to any moron that believes the U.S. is a beacon of freedom. This is no different than when the U.S. claimed the capital of freedom was Washington D.C. when in reality D.C. was the slavery capital of the world.

I'll show you politics in America. Here it is, right here. "I think the puppet on the right shares my beliefs." "I think the puppet on the left is more to my liking." "Hey, wait a minute, there's one guy holding out both puppets!" - Bill Hicks

Next time you go voting, if you want to know who pulls a senators strings, just check their main sponsors. That tells you everything you need to know, sparing you the time you'd waste listening to his propaganda! Georgy vs Hussein Lets LOL all together !

Crashing the world economy isn't a felony. Nor is torture (at least in the view of the Bush administration, it was justified. Whether you agree with it or not is your view, but a case hasn't been brought against anyone who authorized it to try it in court). "Unconstitutional" is a word that is thrown around a lot, but something is really only unconstitutional until the courts agree that it is indeed unconstitutional. Again, no cases have been brought to the courts testing this.

However, sharing files (copyright infringement) and using marijuana are both crimes.

That's why the CEO of Merril Lynch is a free man, while people that smoke pot and are caught go to jail.

I know reddit loves these circlejerk self posts about how sharing files and smoking pot are OK and are "victimless crimes," so I'm prepared to be downvoted.